Trailblazers And Sycophants

Trailblazers and Sycophants:
The embryonic White Nationalist movement has, to date, evolved quite well into that nascent, and implacable child, with the drive and intelligence of an Alexander, Aristotle, and the barbarism of Leonidas. These disparate elements have taken a relatively short life-cycle to adhere, in the main, to the calling of Race, ideology, and the transvaluation of what has gone before; through the dim pubescent phases of instruction and experience, to the ‘new youth’ of today, what has evolved is, well, as is to be expected: No more, No less.Through the din of personal attacks, vitriolic gossip mongering, and those few lucid and bright souls who, personally and collectively, maintain a purpose and vision for the future, it is as it should be. Or is it? One thing that has always occurred, is the ‘peer review’ system, that systematic approach to those happenings and occurrences which ofttimes lend fuel to the fire of discourse and evolution but, also, lends to the obfuscation of those issues most dear to the continuum of this, our White Nationalist imperative. Those Pragmatists and Optimists, each offering their innermost desires and vision of that future which would bring the greatest happiness, independence, and sovereignty to their fellow man. All movements and theoretical experiments lead to this interplay between personalities and ego; between individualism and the collective spirit. Each are necessary, and each has a place in the Once and Future West. As is expected, many voices have given us their input: the status quo of governmental employees, semitic jealousy, the hangers-on of traditional Christianity and its various offshoots, the revolutionaries, the rebellious, the common working class, and the ineluctable division of our intelligentsia. The written word abounds, both for and against our cause, our hope. Words, without a story, however, are like so many rivers, running together independently, never fully realizing the Source. That source, to be more precise, are those individual stories of individuals who, collectively, become the anchor-point, the harbinger of those thoughts and developmental tactics, which have brought us here, to our present presence.White Nationalists, even today, fall into that chasm of misleading and obtuse reckoning by dividing, or letting others divide us as, ‘supremacists’, ‘Jim Crowists’, and traditional ‘nativists’ who, fearing for our lives and power, continue, in ways oblique, so as to mis-direct our detractors and, hence, deprive our opponents of their own justice, waiting to be meted out, to those who dare remind themselves, and the world, of their sense of purpose and hard-won hegemony. As in days past, this contest of world-views remains fixed, and only real and ineluctable Power, will ever change this. This, as well, is old news.Modern, young, and inexperienced zealots of White Nationalism have, to date, been prudently or, in more marked designations, been purposely kept from a larger nationalist view by members who, early on, were more revolutionary in scope and action. Men like Robert Miles, or Tom Metzger who, each in their own right, held views of the common man, not as dupes or potential ‘membership’, saw their People first, and foremost, as being a part of an organic strata, that necessary ‘work force’ of the greater mass led, not strictly by devices of the word, but by action in the political realm and in the streets. Most intellectuals of the day, even as now, showed little or no commonsense in regards to the efforts and successes, by such individuals as these. In our present efforts, the same hydra, lifts her tired and scaly heads.

In the final analysis, it is the common man who will make the difference, this has been Tom Metzger’s policy; Robert Miles, no stranger to theoretical warfare, as well as his professional experience of marginalizing ‘guerrilla’ combatants knew, as do all tacticians, that it is the coalescence of mind and labor, which has always been the foundation of any movement; and while these two examples proved that this was a workable alliance, nevertheless received little support for a Nation wide campaign in this regard. Even then, the posers and sycophants, were ever jealous of the trailblazers. This happened, even as now, because the conservative elements of the status quo were monied, held positions of public acclaim, were ministers and public servants, publishers and hucksters, selling wares from Classic reprints, to gold and silver. The attention of the public is always short-lived, and one cannot blame them for only seeing what this coalition mind-trust, allowed them to see. The pen, even amongst our own, is a mighty sword.

The naive and redundant proclamations of ‘categories’ of White Nationalist, runs through every imaginable arm-chair warrior/patriot within the White Nationalist movement; designations which, for the most part exist, and conditionally were created, by white men during extremis within the confines and, the necessity of, the times in which they found themselves, but which are now being used against us in a comprehensive and heavily subsidized attack on all White people. Titles such as, Klan, Neo-Nazi, Creator, Christian Identity, Christian patriot, Neo-Confederate, Council of Conservative Citizens, skinhead, revisionist, militia/paramilitary, underground terrorist, paleocon, race realist, and populist are, nevertheless, used interchangeably, to the detriment of our movement, by our detractors, as well as ourselves, continuing the disconnect of our disparate elements. This could well have been side-stepped by the intellectuals and publishers who, rather than see a changing and brighter future, closed the door to their mushroom abode, and continued to declare that the sky was falling. Even the word White Nationalist, was not utilized until relatively recently, and only grudgingly.

The longing for preemptive discourse is a reality now, as it was thirty years ago; Louis Beam, for instance, received little or no positive support for his ‘revolutionary rhetoric’ back in the early 80’s, even so, his positions on tactics and strategy were well-grounded, and have proved successful, albeit limited because of the imperiled virtues of the mainstream conservative, unlike the Left, who heartily has embraced Bill Ayers, the father of the SDS, and the various sycophants of Che Guevara, Marx, and Lenin who, today, because of their unapologetic balancing between ‘activism’ and ‘political’ altruism, have gained the preeminent position within the political and military machine of our nation. All this, because writers, institutions, and those who represent them, did not fail to support financially, and to collectively support in times, both good and bad – one should not forget the example of the Chicago 7 – nor the Lawyers who defended them, unlike the cowardly response to the men of Robert J. Mathews’ Die Bruder Schweigen by those arrogant and conservative nay-sayers of the Right; both groups political and direct action oriented. One group, however, continued to grow in stature, and the other, relegated to obscurity, not by the government, they did their job, but by the erstwhile individuals who, while not being of this caliber, failed to carry these efforts to the folk-at-large, thereby making the same examples which, inevitably, leads to that mythos so necessary to the survival of a revolutionary movement, cease to exist before its time.

Those who subscribe to the mainstream, those milk-toast patriots, will forever be with us. It is the duty of our intelligentsia and its accompanying Press, to remember the past, and its mistakes, with a new strategy for the future, namely, to ferret out those spokesmen and writers who, while on the fringe, nevertheless make for honest copy. Until this happens, no ivory tower, or its illusion, will save them from the disconnect of their People, because of the lack of knowledge and information. Alas, were are the brave newspapermen of yesteryear, closer to the folk, and unhindered, except by their own moral code of sympathy and understanding for the downtrodden amongst them?

Where were the tellers of tales, of newsworthy reporting when discussion of the Territorial Imperative, or Leaderless Resistance were coined? Where was the spoken and written works regarding the acronym ZOG – Zionist Occupational Government – which played such a major part in the radicalization and extension of the white reaction to the dismemberment of their way of life? It must be noted, again, that these terms, not just in a rhetorical sense, were a full-bodied Casus belli, of earlier belligerents reacting to a declaration of War individually, and collectively, by a transparent and ever-reaching agenda by interests not of our making. This history, so rich in the telling, has hardly gone noticed by serious publishers and writers; William Regnery will publish Pat Buchanan, but not Louis Beam or David Lane; Noontide Press will address historical and revisionists issues, but has always failed to address the present day activists, theoretician, and seers produced by this, shall we admit it, War, in which we all, most assuredly, are embroiled in.

Some material abounds in which the old and the new of White Nationalism could benefit by, which are works by relatively unknown persons, at least within those inbred circles of white nationalists, such as Committe of The States, Silent Brotherhood, Ruby Ridge, and The White Separatist Movement. Lest we forget, as well, the efforts of a tried and true White Nationalist effort, Rise of The West, an unpolished work, written while in the gulags of this nation, and given little attention by those same individuals who, as before, would rather debate, than give credit to an unworthy or simple unknown stalwart of the folk, although greatly admired and respected by the common folk.

Not much material, to be sure, and not even written by our own, but for one exception; nevertheless, valuable in its reach and informative tone. Information, at the time of these events, was easily obtained, either from direct sources, or second hand, with verification being more readily available, it was not taken advantage of, either for honest comparative analysis, or for the certain largess to be received from this effort. What could have been the reason? Where writers in scarce supply for the efforts of the Chicago 7? Hardly. There is the rub: one group showed courage, yes courage, in the face of overwhelming odds and social criticism, yet it was done, and done again, to the betterment of their cause.

The repetitive whining of all and sundry, about what to do, is nothing less than shameful. As any normal, or bright person could see and anticipate those things heart-felt, or publicly prudent in terms of extending our White Nationalist views, we failed, as a movement, to take advantage of our own sacrifice and vision. Yet, the same continues today. Mirrors, are made for reflection, and a useful tool they are. It is not the reflexion of Psyche which, we seek but, rather, the reflexion of our own persona, our own truthfulness, in what and how we face the future. All it takes is knowledge and dedication, with the courage to take a risk, to stand for something, not just to belong to a club or social back-slapping orgy, that is for lesser persons – not White Nationalists.

To address ‘revolutionary soldiers’ in the field, as ‘gangs’, is the epitome of a mainstream conservative, at least an individual who, at the outset, is still fundamentally flawed in his or her outlook, within the confines of our political and intellectual activities which, as well, oftentimes brings what it does: revolution. We decide our nomenclature, not our opponents.

Revolution in thought is, perforce, a wellspring of our ideology, as the past several generations have left us, any of us, with few alternatives. Better we embrace the destiny set before us, rather than re-hashing the old and timid appraisals of the past, with the same expectations and finality expressed therein.

Who is to remind us, and inform us, as to these events, thoughts and political direction? Surely we, as intelligent and independent writers and speakers, should not give more than passing attention to those who have already published works that, at more than a casual glance ignore, or misrepresent the hard-won attempts and victories of our kind. Where, for instance, is the exhaustive Biography of Ernst Zundel, Richard Girnt Butler or Thomas Metzger, early pioneers of both thought and action? Fame of A Dead Man’s Deeds should have been financed by our own, written by one of our own, not to discount the ‘awakening’ of Robert S. Griffin, author of this inspiring work.

It has been mentioned by few, very few persons, that of men like Wilmot Robertson, who published his own works, out of pocket, with nary a advertisement by mainstream or small town newspapers, even though we had members of Staff, editors, and reporters who saw the genius and truth of his Dispossessed Majority, and the seminal importance of his The Ethnostate. Slackers, all, who failed in their support of an idea which, at the outset, was easily digestible by mainstream America, not to mention the potential largess by these efforts for all involved.

The internet, as a viable medium has, to date, filled our expectations of the future with regard to discussion and debate. Yet, to date, the general public is still enchanted with ‘published’ authors, and assume that the internet is still relegated to the ‘kooks’ and opinions of the mob, never having had the chance to participate in the volk geist of a majority ethos, of which some of us were fortunate enough to have experienced. This is for the near future however, and it behooves us, all of us, to inculcate that singular presence of mind, which will only come about if we, ourselves alone, work diligently and collectively, to promote those ideals which, in their own right, play their parts in creating and establishing that Once and Future West!

The rancor and fear, of the ordinary man on the street, needs more attention than simply the yea-saying of the seer and poet, he needs the public discourse, as was the usual fare a generation ago, without the burden of ‘permits’, when ‘free association’ actually meant a clear and distinct freedom to associate with ones neighbors, in american-style public discourse; why not demand this, for instance, in print, instead of the continuing masturbatory debates about the ‘colour of crime’? Demand these issues, as a matter of course, for our readers and fellow citizens. How about ‘free access to our own Land’? Ownership of private property, of useful and necessary commodities like Cattle, Agriculture, Poultry and the like, with the right to sell, independent of government oversight, with nominal State interdiction regarding health procedures, being necessary to a free people. These are issues which, with only a glance, will mark us free or slave, in the coming years. Very few, indeed, will fight for truths which, although pertinent in ways the common man may not see, but who will, nevertheless, fight for rights if, and he must be exposed to this, that mark him as master of his own ‘ship of state’, not beholden to this pernicious world order, this plantation mentality, which even the share-croppers of old, maintained more freedom and nobility than our modern counterparts.

This was the tenor of the early White Nationalist, discounted by settled and traditional individuals, and for their lack of vision and courage, the tragic dispossessed remain engulfed by treason and empire, unworthy of their name. To the Bards of White Nationalism, you have an obligation and duty to promote, without fear or favor, those issues dearest to the long-term happiness of our people, no matter the discord, which may, for a time, ensue.

The common man believes in himself, but has little telling voice; let those who are able to speak, speak in words clear, resonating with bold truth, political foresight, and the ways and means to facilitate these visions. We have little time to waste.

Copyright 2009 Copyright 2009 (excerpt: Foundations of The Twenty-First Century/Frank L. DeSilva)


Advertisements
This entry was posted in Civic Responsibility, Social Criticism, White Nationalism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s